World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[emwearz]

Fuck that, he has no credentials.

Doesn't that kind of sum up your current President?

[MrPopo]

I'm torn on self defense issues, because it is a gray area for me, the preservation of life is an instinct as much as a choice and one probably shouldn't be held accountable for something they can not help. Further, if my children or my wife were faced with grave danger, I am certain that my Christian beliefs on the matter would take a back seat. Sadly, for me, that means eternal damnation, yet I still couldn't watch as my family was attacked. I realize there is some hypocrisy in that as well, but I am a flawed man. With that said, I definitely empathize with the families of victims, and their plight is not lost on me at all. It's a tough choice to make, and one I hope to never be faced with. Ideals are simple in a vacuum. The intricacies of emotion are the difficult part, I'd like to think I'd have the strength to follow my convictions...in the moment, I can't say for sure.

Interestingly, Judaism is actually quite clear on the notion of self defense or the defense of others; you are obligated to do so, even if it requires you to take the life of the attacker. If you're interested you can read more about it here, but a quick summary are the three things you cannot do to save your own life are to murder someone (which is distinct from killing; basically that you take an innocent life), engage in idolatry, or engage in sexual misconduct as defined in the Torah (adultery, incest, beastiality). In all other cases you not only can break one of the 613 commandments, you MUST.

This is all news to me. I did read through the wiki page and while some of those interpretations are somewhat loose, I can see how the idea is formed. It is quite strange that a Jew only need lay down their life for another Jew. How prevalent is that exclusion of people of other beliefs in your experience?

Honestly, I try to keep an open mind. While those particular beliefs don't coincide with my own, they feel morally sound when put in that context. As I said, it is an issue I struggle with already. Turning the other cheek just doesn't feel right in this kind of scenario, maybe it is just human nature to feel the need to intervene.

Well I was raised in the Reconstructionist sect, which was formed in the 20's when a Rabbi wanted his daughter to have the same recognition that boys got when they came of age (aka have a Bat Mitzvah ceremony) and in general tones down a lot of the anthropomorphism of God that exists in most of the Abrahamic stuff. So it also really tones down or removes the exclusionary stuff. But it is very true that a lot of traditional stuff does focus on the whole "Chosen People" thing. It's the kind of thing that comes about when you spend your entire existence as a persecuted minority no matter where you go. And Judaism as a religion has only recently divorced itself from Jews as a nation/ethnicity; conversion wasn't a thing until the Enlightenment era. Before that the two were completely entwined. A Jew was someone who was descended from Jews and the Jewish people had a shared belief system like how other ethnic groups have their shared cultural elements. And that national identity is still pretty strong in the general population; you'll find a lot of Atheist Jews like myself who don't see it as a contradiction of terms.

To go back to your original question re: the distinction between a Jewish life and a Gentile life, I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who was willing to do all they could to save another Jew but not an arbitrary Gentile. Naturally you'll find cases where they'd blanch at a specific example due to various human factors, but you'd probably find that occurring with both groups anyhow. As you pointed out we're imperfect people and let our flaws drive our actions now and again. Going back to that notion of the Jews as a nation, the religious view is that Jews have a special covenant with God, but that doesn't mean that Gentiles aren't also serving God in their own covenant. This tying of the religious traditions with the Jews as a nation is why there is no tradition of proselytizing; aside from the idea of conversion being akin to saying "I want to convert to Italian" for most of the history it's not necessary for someone to be Jewish to be righteous.

[RCBH928]

Trump ban is for over 220 million people or 3% of the world's population.

The funny part is if he is trying to ban a race, these countries are made of different races (including aryan). If he is trying to ban a religion the same countries are made of different religions (I know for a fact there are a jewish community in Yemen and Iran). If he he is trying to ban an ideology then an ideology has no nationality or passport.

Also, the people/culture/religion he is trying to ban got other nationalities/citizenship from many different countries including an American citizenship. So literally they can come and go as they wish.

I understand he is trying to limit terrorist attacks(if they exist) in the USA but the solution he is offering is futile, decreasing USA's popularity, and splitting the American people.

[ZeroAX]

I understand he is trying to limit terrorist attacks(if they exist) in the USA but the solution he is offering is futile, decreasing USA's popularity, and splitting the American people.

I would like to say that he is actually pushing more people towards terrorist groups, which would lead to the exact opposite result, but then again the alt-right's facade has dropped for some time now. They don't actually care about victims of terrorism. In fact they are probably joyous every time a terrorist attack happens and innocent people die, because then they can say "see, I told you so".

Really they're not much different from the islamic terrorists. One of the survivors of the Paris November 205 attack said that during the actual terrorist attack, the terrorists were checking social media and he heard them say they were "winning" because their attack prompted westerners to posting hateful things about muslims.

(I can look up the story if you want the source)

[CRTGAMER]

The President is not coerced by the political system
President Trump signed three more Executive Actions on Saturday. That makes fifteen XO actions since taking office just over a week ago, sticking to his promise to the nation. Why have presidents in the past not taken on such drastic issues?

The Lobbying order should have run thru congress to make it a permanent resolution. In addition, why does it not include current lobbyists? Hopefully the current 10,000 Lobbyists (some are ex congressman) that are up in years will retire or die off soon.

What is a Lobbyist? - FAQs About Lobbying - http://dc.about.com/od/jobs/a/Lobbying.htm

http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-tr ... sis-234309

Trump signs 3 executive actions on NSC, lobbying and ISIS
President Donald Trump on Saturday signed three new executive actions to reorganize the National Security Council, impose a five-year ban on lobbying for administration appointees and a lifetime ban on lobbying the government for other countries, and order the Department of Defense to come up with a plan within 30 days to defeat ISIS.

Trump ban is for over 220 million people or 3% of the world's population.

The funny part is if he is trying to ban a race, these countries are made of different races (including aryan). If he is trying to ban a religion the same countries are made of different religions (I know for a fact there are a Jewish community in Yemen and Iran). If he he is trying to ban an ideology then an ideology has no nationality or passport.

Also, the people/culture/religion he is trying to ban got other nationalities/citizenship from many different countries including an American citizenship. So literally they can come and go as they wish.

I understand he is trying to limit terrorist attacks(if they exist) in the USA but the solution he is offering is futile, decreasing USA's popularity, and splitting the American people.

No country has the right to visit the United States Of America
America determines who is allowed to enter, the President is taking a hard line to combat terrorists from entering our country. President Obama blocked Iraq refugees for six months back in 2011, yet no protest. Agree on the futility, any country is a door for a possible terrorist to slip by. True too that every country has a mix of race, religions and ideology. ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) is mainly in the middle east, but they do have cowards all over the world. Yes they are cowards attacking the innocent, the Media should call it as such instead of the stupid glamorizing moniker "Lone Wolf". While on the subject, who thought up the term for "Dreamers" for the offspring of illegal immigrants! Call it what it is instead of all the Political Correctness to smooth the situation.

The Iraq man, a former U.S. Army interpreter released from JFK; watch the reaction of the Democrat Senator standing next to him.
He wiped out the ACLU lawyer rep agenda and the Senator's hollow speech "By releasing him we are keeping America safe"

"I like President Trump" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnUI-7qdjPA




A volatile issue with many innocent no longer allowed in the country. It is strange that only certain countries in the Middle East are on the ban list. Definitely not an outright ban on Muslims; for example Saudia Arabia has a huge Muslim population and NOT restricted. Something has to be done, part of the ban is a push on countries to weed out Isis. Even countries not on the ban are on notice, though weak since they are not banned.

[BogusMeatFactory]

CRT your propoganda techniques will not succeed on this forum. No one is cheering you on in the distance.

[jp1]

This is a hopeless endeavor. The countries he did not ban are those which he has business interests in. "America first". How can you continue to ignore his bullshit? You are making a fool of yourself.

How can you support his agenda when he is clearly looking after his business interests above his ridiculously ill conceived agenda? The man is transparent, and not in a good way.
Honestly, I know you will ignore it, but you sound like someone indoctrinated into a cult. It has reached the point you almost don't resemble an individual any longer.

[marurun]

The ACLU has won a stay on Trump's refugee and immigration orders. This is not a judgment on the underlying Constitutional issue, though a stay is usually a good sign.

Audio of Republican discussion on the ACA has been obtained by the Post. While it's good to see Republicans are now finally aware of the possible consequences and complications of repealing and replacing the ACA, they seem determined to plow ahead. They are well aware that they cannot possibly keep their conflicting promises yet they are powerless to stop their own momentum. It's like as if the Titanic saw the iceberg miles out and had the ability but not the will to avoid the collision.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ccf2fa773c

[CRTGAMER]

Something has to be done to weed out ISIS. I was really taken aback by that senator's rhetoric at JFK, a blatant ignorant statement and not protecting the public. The worst is the Sancturay cities, the Mayors have taken an oath to uphold the law which includes the existing immigration laws. President Trump not backing down even though volatile, he is hitting what needs to be done.

https://mic.com/articles/166845/the-lis ... nistration

Donald Trump didn’t come up with the list of Muslim countries he wants to ban. Obama did
How, though, did the Trump administration choose these seven Muslim-majority countries? The truth is it didn't: The countries were chosen during Barack Obama's presidency. According to the draft copy of Trump's executive order, the countries whose citizens are barred entirely from entering the United States is based on a bill that Obama signed into law in December 2015.

Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act as part of an omnibus spending bill. The legislation restricted access to the Visa Waiver Program, which allows citizens from 38 countries who are visiting the United States for less than 90 days to enter without a visa.

Though outside groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and NIAC Action — the sister organization of the National Iranian American Council — opposed the act, the bipartisan bill passed through Congress with little pushback. In February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya, Somali and Yemen to the list of countries one could not have visited — but allowed dual citizens of those countries who had not traveled there access to the Visa Waiver Program. Dual citizens of Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Iran are still ineligible, however.

So, in a nutshell, Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries.

[BogusMeatFactory]

Uh huh. good old mic.com says Obama did it not trump. Seems legit.